Jump to content
Male HQ

All USA Political Discussions (Compiled)


oralb
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 12/11/2021 at 12:48 AM, 7heaven said:

Why can’t a person use present tense to convey a concept that the law provides accused persons such as George Floyd and Daryl Brooks the ability to plead guilty or now? Let the readers decide for themselves you are very salty to have been embarrassed that you claim others don’t know much but ironically u are the other who don’t know much as evidenced by u mistakenly thought Floyd was shot dead. 

 

Harping on an error I made won't help you out.

 

From my perspective it is clear that I was aware of the facts and that George Floyd was dead, when you posted your initial post. What is the difference if he was suffocated to death by a police officer or shot by a police officer when the only point is that he was already dead when you posted.

 

It doesn't make you look any better but is just a sign to distract from your own serious deed.

 

On 12/7/2021 at 12:01 PM, 7heaven said:

The law provides for right of defence to anyone regardless of race, religion, social status. George Floyd and Daryl Brooks etc have the right to plead guilty or not guilty. If they plead not guilty, is it considered nauseating too? 

 

When you posted this it is obvious that you weren't aware of the fact that George Floyd was already deceased.

 

He had no option to please guilty or not guilty as it did no longer apply to him.

 

Why did you ask George Floyd to plead not guilty if you, 7heaven, had known while posting your post that he was dead.

 

What person following logic and a reasonable mindset would ask a dead George Floyd to plead not guilty?

 

Just look again at your initial post: It is just to clear to see that you were not aware that George Floyd had already died.

 

On 12/7/2021 at 12:01 PM, 7heaven said:

The law provides for right of defence to anyone regardless of race, religion, social status. George Floyd and Daryl Brooks etc have the right to plead guilty or not guilty. If they plead not guilty, is it considered nauseating too? 

 

No sane and knowledgeable person had chosen a dead person as an example to illustrate the option of pleading guilty or not guilty. it bears no logic and this is obvious for all BW readers.

 

Which means you are either not sane, or not knowledgeable or both.

 

 

Your extremely obsessive and compulsive trait to defend yourself just to avoid any admission is getting into a ridiculous stage.

 

Your behaviour just displays a similar trait the sort of Boris Johnson in denying that there was a Christmas party at Downing Street last year.

 

You don't gain credits at BW with such behaviour, you only challenge your own credibility at BW. And after all I don't think there is much trust left by BW readers for you, should be already in the red zone negative.

 

 

I am quite sure that BW readers already made their informed decision on your knowledge level about George Floyd and whether you knew in your initial first post if he was dead or not.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Capitol attack panel obtains PowerPoint that set out plan for Trump to stage coup

Presentation turned over by Mark Meadows made several recommendations for Trump to pursue to retain presidency

 

The Guardian, Sat 11 Dec 2021

 

 

Former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows turned over to the House select committee investigating the 6 January Capitol attack a PowerPoint recommending Donald Trump to declare a national security emergency in order to return himself to the presidency.

 

 

 

The fact that Meadows was in possession of a PowerPoint the day before the Capitol attack that detailed ways to stage a coup suggests he was at least aware of efforts by Trump and his allies to stop Joe Biden’s certification from taking place on 6 January.

 

The PowerPoint, titled “Election Fraud, Foreign Interference & Options for 6 Jan”, made several recommendations for Trump to pursue in order to retain the presidency for a second term on the basis of lies and debunked conspiracies about widespread election fraud.

 

Meadows turned over a version of the PowerPoint presentation that he received in an email and spanned 38 pages, according to a source familiar with the matter.

 

The Guardian reviewed a second, 36-page version of the PowerPoint marked for dissemination with 5 January metadata, which had some differences with what the select committee received. But the title of the PowerPoint and its recommendations remained the same, the source said.

Senators and members of Congress should first be briefed about foreign interference, the PowerPoint said, at which point Trump could declare a national emergency, declare all electronic voting invalid, and ask Congress to agree on a constitutionally acceptable remedy.

 

The PowerPoint also outlined three options for then vice-president Mike Pence to abuse his largely ceremonial role at the joint session of Congress on 6 January, when Biden was to be certified president, and unilaterally return Trump to the White House.

 

Pence could pursue one of three options, the PowerPoint said: seat Trump slates of electors over the objections of Democrats in key states, reject the Biden slates of electors, or delay the certification to allow for a “vetting” and counting of only “legal paper ballots”.

 

The final option for Pence is similar to an option that was simultaneously being advanced on 4 and 5 January by Trump lieutenants – led by lawyers Rudy Giuliani and John Eastman, as well as Trump strategist Steve Bannon – working from the Willard hotel in Washington DC.

 

The Guardian revealed last week that sometime between the late evening of 5 January and the early hours of 6 January, after Pence declined to go ahead with such plans, Trump then pressed his lieutenants about how to stop Biden’s certification from taking place entirely.

 

The recommendations in the PowerPoint for both Trump and Pence were based on wild and unsubstantiated claims of election fraud, including that “the Chinese systematically gained control over our election system” in eight key battleground states.

 

The then acting attorney general, Jeff Rosen, and his predecessor, Bill Barr, who had both been appointed by Trump, by 5 January had already determined that there was no evidence of voter fraud sufficient to change the outcome of the 2020 election.

 

House investigators said that they became aware of the PowerPoint after it surfaced in more than 6,000 documents Meadows turned over to the select committee. The PowerPoint was to be presented “on the Hill”, a reference to Congress, the panel said.

 

The powerpoint was presented on 4 January to a number of Republican senators and members of Congress, the source said. Trump’s lawyers working at the Willard hotel were not shown the presentation, according to a source familiar with the matter.

 

But the select committee said they did find in the materials turned over by Meadows, his text messages with a member of Congress, who told Meadows about a “highly controversial” plan to send slates of electors for Trump to the joint session of Congress.

 

Meadows replied: “I love it.”

 

Trump’s former White House chief of staff had turned over the materials to the select committee until the cooperation deal broke down on Tuesday, when Meadows’ attorney, Terwilliger, abruptly told House investigators that Meadows would no longer help the investigation.

 

The select committee announced on Wednesday that in response, it would refer Meadows for criminal prosecution for defying a subpoena. The chairman of the select committee, Bennie Thompson, said the vote to hold Meadows in contempt of Congress would come next week.

 

“The select committee will meet next week to advance a report recommending that the House cite Mr Meadows for contempt of Congress and refer him to the Department of Justice for prosecution,” Thompson said in a statement.

 

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2021 at 2:30 PM, singalion said:

 

But why did you comment about Obama or Bush in plenty of your past posts at this thread.

 

We are aware that logic is not one of your biggest strengths.....


Are there any rules here that one should or should not comment plenty or few about certain presidents? 
 

We are aware objectivity is not one of your skills…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2021 at 2:57 PM, singalion said:

 

Harping on an error I made won't help you out.

 

From my perspective it is clear that I was aware of the facts and that George Floyd was dead, when you posted your initial post. What is the difference if he was suffocated to death by a police officer or shot by a police officer when the only point is that he was already dead when you posted.

 

It doesn't make you look any better but is just a sign to distract from your own serious deed.

 

 

When you posted this it is obvious that you weren't aware of the fact that George Floyd was already deceased.

 

He had no option to please guilty or not guilty as it did no longer apply to him.

 

Why did you ask George Floyd to plead not guilty if you, 7heaven, had known while posting your post that he was dead.

 

What person following logic and a reasonable mindset would ask a dead George Floyd to plead not guilty?

 

Just look again at your initial post: It is just to clear to see that you were not aware that George Floyd had already died.

 

 

No sane and knowledgeable person had chosen a dead person as an example to illustrate the option of pleading guilty or not guilty. it bears no logic and this is obvious for all BW readers.

 

Which means you are either not sane, or not knowledgeable or both.

 

 

Your extremely obsessive and compulsive trait to defend yourself just to avoid any admission is getting into a ridiculous stage.

 

Your behaviour just displays a similar trait the sort of Boris Johnson in denying that there was a Christmas party at Downing Street last year.

 

You don't gain credits at BW with such behaviour, you only challenge your own credibility at BW. And after all I don't think there is much trust left by BW readers for you, should be already in the red zone negative.

 

 

I am quite sure that BW readers already made their informed decision on your knowledge level about George Floyd and whether you knew in your initial first post if he was dead or not.

 

 

 

 

 
Again u totally missed the point. George Floyd and Daryl Brooks when accused of crimes like anyone of any race, religion or political affiliation are provided by law the option to plead guilty or not. This necessarily mean they are alive to exercise that option. Floyd were accused of a litany of crimes in 1990s and 2000s and back then he had the same option as other accused persons the option to plead guilty or not. 
 

Readers here smart enough will see through just how desperate you are to reverse your own ignorance about not knowing how Floyd was killed to claim that I didn’t know Floyd was already dead. 
 

You’ll be a champion straw grabber. Lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2021 at 5:33 PM, 7heaven said:

 

 

And the State police is under the authority of the US Federal Administration or Biden?

 

This is just another example of your silly habit to post something on BW without any reflection.

 

If you had any intelligence you had recognised before re-posting a manipulative smear that Biden has nothing to do with the US States police forces, i.e. the police forces of each of the 50 US states...

 

Is Biden in charge of controlling local crime?

what measures does the US administration / Biden presidency have to control US state crime in the US?

 

The US police

Structure and organization

There’s no national police force in the US, where policing is organised on a state and local basis. The country has around 500,000 police officers and a total of 40,000 separate police forces,

 

Police forces include city police (possibly with separate departments to deal with schools, traffic and even refuse), county police, transport police, sheriffs’ departments, state police (state troopers) and highway forces

 

The division between federal and state law

murder is classified as a state* crime, while less serious crimes such as taking a woman across state lines for immoral purposes is a federal crime.

 

* State here means US State like California, Florida, Texas etc.

 

 

And is it not Biden who proposed to reduce the availability of guns and weapons?

 

But who in the US is obstructing Biden to reign into arms sales in the US ????

 

 

 

Your reposting of this slogan is nothing else than more evidence of your lack of knowledge and lack of intelligence also and your only aim to post manipulative, demagogue slogans onto BW. Because if you had some intelligence you had already recognised the inconsistency of this claim and linking murders to Biden.

 

Don't blame a US president who is not in charge of local crimes on US state's level.

 

 

You are shouting your slogan into the wrong forest.

 

Your next myth creating is already debunked before it started off.

 

 

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2021 at 7:26 PM, singalion said:

 

And the State police is under the authority of the US Federal Administration or Biden?

 

This is just another example of your silly habit to post something on BW without any reflection.

 

If you had any intelligence you had recognised before re-posting a manipulative smear that Biden has nothing to do with the US States police forces, i.e. the police forces of each of the 50 US states...

 

Is Biden in charge of controlling local crime?

what measures does the US administration / Biden presidency have to control US state crime in the US?

 

The US police

Structure and organization

There’s no national police force in the US, where policing is organised on a state and local basis. The country has around 500,000 police officers and a total of 40,000 separate police forces,

 

Police forces include city police (possibly with separate departments to deal with schools, traffic and even refuse), county police, transport police, sheriffs’ departments, state police (state troopers) and highway forces

 

The division between federal and state law

murder is classified as a state* crime, while less serious crimes such as taking a woman across state lines for immoral purposes is a federal crime.

 

* State here means US State like California, Florida, Texas etc.

 

 

And is it not Biden who proposed to reduce the availability of guns and weapons?

 

But who in the US is obstructing Biden to reign into arms sales in the US ????

 

 

 

Your reposting of this slogan is nothing else than more evidence of your lack of knowledge and lack of intelligence also and your only aim to post manipulative, demagogue slogans onto BW. Because if you had some intelligence you had already recognised the inconsistency of this claim and linking murders to Biden.

 

Don't blame a US president who is not in charge of local crimes on US state's level.

 

 

You are shouting your slogan into the wrong forest.

 

Your next myth creating is already debunked before it started off.

 

 

 


Biden’s Attorney General directed FBI to investigate parents who disrupt school boards on request of some teachers union. School boards are located in individual states, how come Biden’s AG can go and interfere? If this can be done, why couldn’t Biden direct his AG to direct FBI to get involved in maintaining law and order in individual states to complement local police resources? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Juxtaposed Yourself

US President Joe Biden shared a story that goes back to a more collegial era in Washington, when laws could actually be passed in a truly bipartisan manner, during his eulogy for 1996 Presidential Runner-Up, 1976 Vice Presidential Runner-Up, 1980 & 1988 Republican Nomination Contender, former Senate Majority Leader, and decorated World War II veteran Bob Dole.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2021 at 5:22 PM, 7heaven said:

 Again u totally missed the point. George Floyd and Daryl Brooks when accused of crimes like anyone of any race, religion or political affiliation are provided by law the option to plead guilty or not. This necessarily mean they are alive to exercise that option. Floyd were accused of a litany of crimes in 1990s and 2000s and back then he had the same option as other accused persons the option to plead guilty or not. 
 

Readers here smart enough will see through just how desperate you are to reverse your own ignorance about not knowing how Floyd was killed to claim that I didn’t know Floyd was already dead. 
 

You’ll be a champion straw grabber. Lol. 

 

You miss the point totally and even  further disclose with above post how little knowledge you have on the facts from the George Floyd case.

 

George Floyd had by no means be required to please guilty or not guilty at all!

His case was never any case that had been qualified to be brought to any court.

 

The police officers who intended to arrest him never took hold of the alleged fake 20 USD bill.

What wanted they charge him for?

Calling for his own life while under inappropriate restraint by police officers???

 

But this is further strengthening evidence that you did not know when you posted your first initial post on George Floyd that he was already a dead man.

 

Readers of BW are smart enough to see who and what was the starting point of this whole Floyd thing:

 

On 12/7/2021 at 12:01 PM, 7heaven said:

The law provides for right of defence to anyone regardless of race, religion, social status. George Floyd and Daryl Brooks etc have the right to plead guilty or not guilty. If they plead not guilty, is it considered nauseating too? 

 

Namely your initial post.

 

This case here is not about me. You can try as often as your want to switch the tables but this case here is solely about you and your lack of knowledge on the George Floyd case and your error that when you posted below you thought Floyd was able to plead anything while in fact Floyd was already a dead man. 

 

On 12/7/2021 at 12:01 PM, 7heaven said:

The law provides for right of defence to anyone regardless of race, religion, social status. George Floyd and Daryl Brooks etc have the right to plead guilty or not guilty. If they plead not guilty, is it considered nauseating too? 

 

Already that second part "If they plead not guilty," is sufficient evidence to lay down the fact that you did not know George Floyd was already dead.

 

Why would you ask this question to a dead man? Your sentence "If they plead not guilty" makes only sense when Floyd was still alive. Otherwise why would it have been nauseating?

 

Your own post caught you yourself evidencing sufficiently for every reader of BW to demonstrate that it is a fact that you had not know when you posted the above that Floyd was dead.

 

Nobody needs to grab any straws when you yourself gave the best evidence of your lack of knowledge this now even twice on George Floyd and when posting this post you were not aware that George Floyd was dead. .

 

 

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2021 at 7:57 PM, 7heaven said:


Biden’s Attorney General directed FBI to investigate parents who disrupt school boards on request of some teachers union. School boards are located in individual states, how come Biden’s AG can go and interfere? If this can be done, why couldn’t Biden direct his AG to direct FBI to get involved in maintaining law and order in individual states to complement local police resources? 

 

The answer is simple:

 

Because you, 7heaven,  lack the intelligence to understand what powers are vested in the Federal US and what in the individual US states.

 

If you had intelligence then you had never asked that question. 

 

 

 

 

Kudos to you, 7heaven, for proving this for everyone here at BW!

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2021 at 9:26 PM, singalion said:

 

You miss the point totally and even  further disclose with above post how little knowledge you have on the facts from the George Floyd case.

 

George Floyd had by no means be required to please guilty or not guilty at all!

His case was never any case that had been qualified to be brought to any court.

 

The police officers who intended to arrest him never took hold of the alleged fake 20 USD bill.

What wanted they charge him for?

Calling for his own life while under inappropriate restraint by police officers???

 

But this is further strengthening evidence that you did not know when you posted your first initial post on George Floyd that he was already a dead man.

 

Readers of BW are smart enough to see who and what was the starting point of this whole Floyd thing:

 

 

Namely your initial post.

 

This case here is not about me. You can try as often as your want to switch the tables but this case here is solely about you and your lack of knowledge on the George Floyd case and your error that when you posted below you thought Floyd was able to plead anything while in fact Floyd was already a dead man. 

 

 

Already that second part "If they plead not guilty," is sufficient evidence to lay down the fact that you did not know George Floyd was already dead.

 

Why would you ask this question to a dead man? Your sentence "If they plead not guilty" makes only sense when Floyd was still alive. Otherwise why would it have been nauseating?

 

Your own post caught you yourself evidencing sufficiently for every reader of BW to demonstrate that it is a fact that you had not know when you posted the above that Floyd was dead.

 

Nobody needs to grab any straws when you yourself gave the best evidence of your lack of knowledge this now even twice on George Floyd and when posting this post you were not aware that George Floyd was dead. .

 

 

 


George Floyd was accused of a litany of crimes in the 1990s and 2000s. He like any other accused persons are able to plead guilty or not as that is his legal right. My original post to point out Floyd, Brooks like Ethan Crumbley have the legal right to plead guilty. Was Floyd already dead in the 1990s and 2000s? 
 

Clearly I was not even referring to the May 2020 incident, and there is no evidence to even remotely suggest so. You just use your usual misinterpretation and narrow focus on tenses to fit your narrative. 
 

Ironically, you were the one who clearly did not even know how Floyd was killed. Floyd’s killing was covered wall to wall day and night and yet you didn’t even know. That is an elementary mistake. Lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2021 at 9:36 PM, singalion said:

 

The answer is simple:

 

Because you, 7heaven,  lack the intelligence to understand what powers are vested in the Federal US and what in the individual US states.

 

If you had intelligence then you had never asked that question. 

 

 

 

 

Kudos to you, 7heaven, for proving this for everyone here at BW!

 

 

 

 


You just rebutted people’s post by self-proclaiming someone lack the intelligence to understand something. That is really convincing. Lol. 
 

Which sane person will believe that the leader of a country is not responsible for maintaining law and order in the country? 
 

Kudos to you for proving that your sanity is questionable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2021 at 1:06 PM, 7heaven said:

 

 

 

 

This is the problem with people like you and the extreme rightwing propaganda you consume. You are seriously trying to deflect from a Republican activist being indicted for downloading, viewing, and distributing videos depicting child sex abuse of very young girls ... with Democrats showing concern about a gay actor who claimed to be the victim of a hate crime before it was known that he was lying (allegedly to draw sympathy and get a bigger contract) ... when they are not the same in any way, shape, or form. You can't argue "Both Sides" in this situation.

 

Democrats may have jumped to conclusions in supporting Smollett, but that is because they oppose violence being inflicted upon anyone due to race, gender, religion, orientation, or any other characteristic, and the disgraced actor used that compassion to his advantage, until his ruse was revealed, and now he will pay the legal price for his wrongdoing. If asked, Democrats will say the facts led to his sentencing, and they support the rule of law. Republicans continued to embrace Duggar for many years after he was exposed as having molested his younger sisters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 1:06 AM, 7heaven said:

 

 

 

 

What logic is that again?

 

A.

Biden should have predicted when the incident happened that Smollett had eventually faked the attack on him?

 

B.

The second question is:

Assuming the attack was real, a US president should not speak out against any hate crimes?

 

Can you please start using your own brain first, before you copy unreflectedly some nonsensical twitter tweets into BW???

 

Posting these tweets here don't evidence that you 7heaven are intelligent, it proves exactly the opposite!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 5:55 AM, Guest 2003 said:

 

This is the problem with people like you and the extreme rightwing propaganda you consume. You are seriously trying to deflect from a Republican activist being indicted for downloading, viewing, and distributing videos depicting child sex abuse of very young girls ... with Democrats showing concern about a gay actor who claimed to be the victim of a hate crime before it was known that he was lying (allegedly to draw sympathy and get a bigger contract) ... when they are not the same in any way, shape, or form. You can't argue "Both Sides" in this situation.

 

Democrats may have jumped to conclusions in supporting Smollett, but that is because they oppose violence being inflicted upon anyone due to race, gender, religion, orientation, or any other characteristic, and the disgraced actor used that compassion to his advantage, until his ruse was revealed, and now he will pay the legal price for his wrongdoing. If asked, Democrats will say the facts led to his sentencing, and they support the rule of law. Republicans continued to embrace Duggar for many years after he was exposed as having molested his younger sisters.


This is the problem with you and the extreme left wing narrative and propaganda you ingest and subsequently regurgitate. 
 

You are seriously gaslighting and trivialising the shortsightedness and recklessness of Democrats who are extremely quick to capitalise on the race card to propagandise their agenda in the Jussie Smollett self-staged fake hate crime.
 

The Democrats all the way up to the highest leadership in Biden, Kamala Harris and Nancy Pelosi pounced on Smollett case because his alleged account of hate crime was perfect for their agenda; that Smollett was attacked by someone supporting MAGA (Make America Great Again, a term used by Trump) and he belongs to a minority race.


Such capitalisation of race will further divide the country and tragically Democrats politicians continue to politicise race. 
 

In Jussie Smollett case, the Democrat prosecutor Kim Foxx even dropped charges against Smollett after he was found out to have faked the hate crime. Fortunately after public criticism, a special prosecutor finally recharged Smollett.
 

What makes it worse is Biden and Kamala Harris themselves are lawyers but did not see fit to hold judgement and rushed to support Smollett in 2019 using their megaphone twitter account even before investigations are completed. 

Edited by 7heaven
Race bait
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 5:55 AM, Guest 2003 said:

 

This is the problem with people like you and the extreme rightwing propaganda you consume. You are seriously trying to deflect from a Republican activist being indicted for downloading, viewing, and distributing videos depicting child sex abuse of very young girls ... with Democrats showing concern about a gay actor who claimed to be the victim of a hate crime before it was known that he was lying (allegedly to draw sympathy and get a bigger contract) ... when they are not the same in any way, shape, or form. You can't argue "Both Sides" in this situation.

 

Democrats may have jumped to conclusions in supporting Smollett, but that is because they oppose violence being inflicted upon anyone due to race, gender, religion, orientation, or any other characteristic, and the disgraced actor used that compassion to his advantage, until his ruse was revealed, and now he will pay the legal price for his wrongdoing. If asked, Democrats will say the facts led to his sentencing, and they support the rule of law. Republicans continued to embrace Duggar for many years after he was exposed as having molested his younger sisters.

 

No, the real problem is that 7heaven is not sufficiently smart to recognise the demagoguery and  attempt to manipulate in putting up such "blames" on Democrats in the Smollett case. 

 

You can only explain it through lack of intelligence.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 9:59 AM, 7heaven said:

The Democrats all the way up to the highest leadership in Biden, Kamala Harris and Nancy Pelosi pounced on Smollett case because his alleged account of hate crime was perfect for their agenda;

 

And Republicans up to the way up to the highest leadership pounce on nothing that fits their agenda?

 

Uncle, when do you start using your brain before posting such nonsensical statements???

 

Please give it a break and start thinking first...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 9:55 AM, singalion said:

 

What logic is that again?

 

A.

Biden should have predicted when the incident happened that Smollett had eventually faked the attack on him?

 

B.

The second question is:

Assuming the attack was real, a US president should not speak out against any hate crimes?

 

Can you please start using your own brain first, before you copy unreflectedly some nonsensical twitter tweets into BW???

 

Posting these tweets here don't evidence that you 7heaven are intelligent, it proves exactly the opposite!

 

 


Simple.

 

A. Biden if he is worth his salt in a university education in law, he should have waited for investigations to be completed before claiming Smollett is a victim of hate crime. In Biden’s original twit before investigations are completed he already assumed Smollett is the victim because Biden said “What happened today to #JussieSmollett  must never be tolerated in this country.

 

 

B. Nobody said Biden should not speak out against hate crimes. And a point to note when Biden rushed to assume it was a hate crime in Smollett’s case in 2019, he was not the President. 
 

Next, in Smollett’s case, u don’t have to assume because there was no hate crime. 

Edited by 7heaven
Jumping the gun
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 10:02 AM, singalion said:

 

No, the real problem is that 7heaven is not sufficiently smart to recognise the demagoguery and  attempt to manipulate in putting up such "blames" on Democrats in the Smollett case. 

 

You can only explain it through lack of intelligence.

 

 


Personal attacks seem to be characteristics of someone with intelligence. 
 

Sadly, when one is failing to refute an argument, one will proclaim someone as lacking intelligence and not sufficiently smart. Lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2021 at 5:33 PM, 7heaven said:

 

 

On 12/11/2021 at 7:57 PM, 7heaven said:


Biden’s Attorney General directed FBI to investigate parents who disrupt school boards on request of some teachers union. School boards are located in individual states, how come Biden’s AG can go and interfere? If this can be done, why couldn’t Biden direct his AG to direct FBI to get involved in maintaining law and order in individual states to complement local police resources? 

 

On 12/12/2021 at 12:09 AM, 7heaven said:


You just rebutted people’s post by self-proclaiming someone lack the intelligence to understand something. That is really convincing. Lol. 
 

Which sane person will believe that the leader of a country is not responsible for maintaining law and order in the country? 
 

Kudos to you for proving that your sanity is questionable. 

 

But your own posts are a reflection that you either (in pouncing on a certain agenda) ignore the distribution of powers in the US or a reflection of your own lack of intelligence.

 

If you had known or understood the division of US states and the Federal State in a country like US, you had refrained from copying a dump post into BW.

 

The US is simply not a centralised country like Singapore where all powers are vested in the President/PM but a federal state.

 

These police powers for such crimes are vested in the US States.

 

=> Your blame on Biden on any increase of murder cases in the US just goes fail. He is not in charge of this.

The US governors are in charge of such crimes.

 

Here again the evidence:

The US police

Structure and organization

There’s no national police force in the US, where policing is organised on a state and local basis. The country has around 500,000 police officers and a total of 40,000 separate police forces,

 

Police forces include city police (possibly with separate departments to deal with schools, traffic and even refuse), county police, transport police, sheriffs’ departments, state police (state troopers) and highway forces

 

The division between federal and state law

murder is classified as a state* crime,

 

* State here means US State like California, Florida, Texas etc.

 

 

Biden can jump in his oval office to the ceiling but he can do anything about it, he can address the issue in a speech  but it is the job of the US governors to control murder crimes in their states.

 

It is obvious that in your repost of another dumb twitter tweet you had not spared a thought about the background and once again were not aware of the distribution of police powers in the US.

 

I had every right to point that out in my reaction to your post.

 

Use your brain first before just copying nonsense.

 

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 10:37 AM, singalion said:

 

 

 

But your own posts are a reflection that you either (in pouncing on a certain agenda) ignore the distribution of powers in the US or a reflection of your own lack of intelligence.

 

If you had known or understood the division of US states and the Federal State in a country like US, you had refrained from copying a dump post into BW.

 

The US is simply not a centralised country like Singapore where all powers are vested in the President/PM but a federal state.

 

These police powers for such crimes are vested in the US States.

 

=> Your blame on Biden on any increase of murder cases in the US just goes fail. He is not in charge of this.

The US governors are in charge of such crimes.

 

Here again the evidence:

The US police

Structure and organization

There’s no national police force in the US, where policing is organised on a state and local basis. The country has around 500,000 police officers and a total of 40,000 separate police forces,

 

Police forces include city police (possibly with separate departments to deal with schools, traffic and even refuse), county police, transport police, sheriffs’ departments, state police (state troopers) and highway forces

 

The division between federal and state law

murder is classified as a state* crime,

 

* State here means US State like California, Florida, Texas etc.

 

 

Biden can jump in his oval office to the ceiling but he can do anything about it, he can address the issue in a speech  but it is the job of the US governors to control murder crimes in their states.

 

It is obvious that in your repost of another dumb twitter tweet you had not spared a thought about the background and once again were not aware of the distribution of police powers in the US.

 

I had every right to point that out in my reaction to your post.

 

Use your brain first before just copying nonsense.

 

 


Ok, Biden should just let those states in the country for which he is the President  of continue with lawlessness. 
 

And then come mid-terms and 2024 Presidential race, Biden should just claim he is not responsible for high murder and other crime rates in US, and call anyone who suggest he is responsible for fighting crimes as lacking intelligence. That would his and Democrats winning formula. Lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 12:00 AM, 7heaven said:

George Floyd was accused of a litany of crimes in the 1990s and 2000s. He like any other accused persons are able to plead guilty or not as that is his legal right. My original post to point out Floyd, Brooks like Ethan Crumbley have the legal right to plead guilty. Was Floyd already dead in the 1990s and 2000s? 
 

Clearly I was not even referring to the May 2020 incident, and there is no evidence to even remotely suggest so. You just use your usual misinterpretation and narrow focus on tenses to fit your narrative. 
 

Ironically, you were the one who clearly did not even know how Floyd was killed. Floyd’s killing was covered wall to wall day and night and yet you didn’t even know. That is an elementary mistake. Lol. 

 

 

We can all assume that your "clearly" in the second paragraph is clearly not right.

It is just an escape from what you posted initially.

 

Why did you jump on George Floyd actually?

Because his case is recent?

 

Certain BW readers here are not as stupid as  to read your posts.

 

Your defences and clinging on this issue plus your usual face saving measures are going nowhere.

 

Here your initial post:

 

On 12/7/2021 at 12:01 PM, 7heaven said:

The law provides for right of defence to anyone regardless of race, religion, social status. George Floyd and Daryl Brooks etc have the right to plead guilty or not guilty. If they plead not guilty, is it considered nauseating too?

The problem with the American system is people tend to view things from racial lens all too often. If a verdict is given that is not what a certain group want, they will cry foul and wallow about how the jury or judge is racist. 

 

What was there to misinterpret. You wrote clearly that George Floyd has the right to plead guilty or not guilty. Then, following in the second sentence you wrote "If they plead not guilty"

 

Why would a dead person such as Floyd plead not guilty in future, when he is dead?

Since when does a dead person have a right to plead guilty or not guilty?

 

You did not write "George Floyd, if he had been still alive, had the right to plead guilty or not guilty.

Also you did not write "If they plead not guilty, assuming Floyd was still alive, is it nauseating?"

 

We can all at BW see what you wrote and how you wrote things.

 

This is already sufficient evidence that you did not know that Floyd had died already and assumed he was still alive when you posted the first post.

 

There is nothing to add. You can go circles, but it is too obvious.

 

Everyone at BW has seen this already.

 

Your post was even disgusting towards George Floyd and disrespecting to him and his family.

 

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 9:59 AM, 7heaven said:

This is the problem with you and the extreme left wing narrative and propaganda you ingest and subsequently regurgitate. 
 

 

Unfortunately, in contrast to yourself in repeatedly parroting the RNC propaganda, Guest 2003 in his post did not "regurgitate" any "left wing narrative or propaganda" in his post.

 

He was simply only commenting on your post without adding any outside third party content.

 

As such your response blame on Guest 2003 on extreme left wing narrative and propaganda to him does not make sense

and is in fact false.

 

You are creating your own narrative here.

 

On 12/12/2021 at 5:55 AM, Guest 2003 said:

 

This is the problem with people like you and the extreme rightwing propaganda you consume. You are seriously trying to deflect from a Republican activist being indicted for downloading, viewing, and distributing videos depicting child sex abuse of very young girls ... with Democrats showing concern about a gay actor who claimed to be the victim of a hate crime before it was known that he was lying (allegedly to draw sympathy and get a bigger contract) ... when they are not the same in any way, shape, or form. You can't argue "Both Sides" in this situation.

 

Democrats may have jumped to conclusions in supporting Smollett, but that is because they oppose violence being inflicted upon anyone due to race, gender, religion, orientation, or any other characteristic, and the disgraced actor used that compassion to his advantage, until his ruse was revealed, and now he will pay the legal price for his wrongdoing. If asked, Democrats will say the facts led to his sentencing, and they support the rule of law. Republicans continued to embrace Duggar for many years after he was exposed as having molested his younger sisters.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was merely pointing to your inconsistencies and contradictions at BW.

 

You cannot say that you don't comment on past presidents while on the other hand you do.

 

You are turning your arguments as to the direction from where the wind blows...

 

On 12/11/2021 at 12:45 AM, 7heaven said:

Why should I admit anything about somebody else who is not the current president? 

 

On 12/11/2021 at 2:30 PM, singalion said:

 

But why did you comment about Obama or Bush in plenty of your past posts at this thread.

 

We are aware that logic is not one of your biggest strengths.....

 

On 12/11/2021 at 5:17 PM, 7heaven said:


Are there any rules here that one should or should not comment plenty or few about certain presidents? 
 

We are aware objectivity is not one of your skills…

 

And don't digress on your usual selective word picking such as "plenty or few".

 

That was not the point.

 

The point was to highlight your inconsistency in reasoning and in the resulting contradictions.

Which means either you comment on past presidents or you don't, but don't paint a picture that you did not comment on other past presidents.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2021 at 12:45 AM, 7heaven said:

Why should I admit anything about somebody else who is not the current president? 

 

By the way with above post you stated that you would not keep up with the truth and that you would keep silent on

inappropriate behaviour  or crimes of former presidents or deny the truth, if it does not fit your agenda, political spectrum etc.

 

This about your objectivity!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2021 at 5:33 PM, 7heaven said:

 

 

Guys !

 

Don't fall trap on these truth distortions by the RNC (Republican) Tweets:

 

Homicides in 22 US cities continue to rise in 2021 but at a slower pace, report says

(CNN) The number of homicides in the United States continued to rise in the first three quarters of 2021, but at a slower pace, one year after a record increase in murders, according to the latest quarterly report published Monday by the Council on Criminal Justice.

A study of homicides in 22 cities during the first nine months of this year showed the number of murders was 4% greater than the same period in 2020

 

 

 

=> The provisional numbers of 2021 only reflect 22 major cities in the US, which saw an increase of 4% but are not reflective of the whole of US.

 

 

And the blame on Biden goes fail also as I already evidenced.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here 7heaven, look onto the statistics what US States come in as second and third for 2020.

 

Tell us what Governors with what political affiliation do govern and control both the number two and three in the list.

 

Please tell us!

 

And why did you keep silent when US was run by Republican Donald Trump in 2020 on these high numbers?

 

Total number of homicides in the United States in 2020, by state

California 2203

Texas 1931

Florida 1290

Illinois 1191

Pennsylvania 1009

Georgia 943

 

With the largest population, California also recorded the largest number of homicides in 2020, at 2,203 for the year. Texas had the second-highest number of murders, with 1,931 for the year.

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/195331/number-of-murders-in-the-us-by-state/

 

 

77% of all violent crimes in the US are caused by guns.

 

 

Note: The numbers are for 2020 (before Biden took office, while I repeat again that murders are not in the charge of US presidents but  the indivudual 50 US states.

 

FBI Data Shows An Unprecedented Spike In Murders Nationwide In 2020

September 27, 2021
 

The number of murders in the United States jumped by nearly 30% in 2020 compared with the previous year in the largest single-year increase ever recorded in the country, according to official FBI statistics released Monday.

The data shows 21,570 homicides in the U.S. in 2020, which is a staggering 4,901 more than in 2019. The tally makes clear — in concrete terms — just how violent last year was.

 

Much of the violence was driven by firearms, with nearly 77% of murders being committed with some sort of gun.

 

That figure has been slowly inching up over the past several years, Asher said, but he said 2020 is the first time that figure has eclipsed 75%.

 

 

A map showing that the murder rate increased in most states in 2020

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2021 at 5:33 PM, 7heaven said:

 

 

 

Just for the information to all BW readers and those following this thread:

 

The above was another truth distortion attempt by the Grand Old Party (Republicans) and their smear campaigners.

 

The numbers released by the FBI and CDC on which the CBS report was based refers to the increase of violent crime in 2020 and the release of data by both organisations.

 

RNC is now even using 2020 figures to blame Biden.

This is utterly manipulative and disgusting.

 

The provisional numbers of 2021 which were reported by an independent center released some days ago only reflect 22 major cities in the US, which saw an increase of 4% but are not reflective of the whole of US.

 

 

But let's ask:

Who was the US president in 2020?

 

Can anyone tell us?

 

 

And it is another example that 7heaven just parrots silly slogans without verifying the background!

 

The myth was debunked before it even took off.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 11:12 AM, singalion said:

 

 

We can all assume that your "clearly" in the second paragraph is clearly not right.

It is just an escape from what you posted initially.

 

Why did you jump on George Floyd actually?

Because his case is recent?

 

Certain BW readers here are not as stupid as  to read your posts.

 

Your defences and clinging on this issue plus your usual face saving measures are going nowhere.

 

Here your initial post:

 

 

What was there to misinterpret. You wrote clearly that George Floyd has the right to plead guilty or not guilty. Then, following in the second sentence you wrote "If they plead not guilty"

 

Why would a dead person such as Floyd plead not guilty in future, when he is dead?

Since when does a dead person have a right to plead guilty or not guilty?

 

You did not write "George Floyd, if he had been still alive, had the right to plead guilty or not guilty.

Also you did not write "If they plead not guilty, assuming Floyd was still alive, is it nauseating?"

 

We can all at BW see what you wrote and how you wrote things.

 

This is already sufficient evidence that you did not know that Floyd had died already and assumed he was still alive when you posted the first post.

 

There is nothing to add. You can go circles, but it is too obvious.

 

Everyone at BW has seen this already.

 

Your post was even disgusting towards George Floyd and disrespecting to him and his family.

 

 


U had wrongly assumed I brought up Floyd because of the May 2020 incident. However, I brought up Floyd and Daryl Brooks because both of them like Ethan Crumbley are allowed by the law to plead guilty or now. Floyd was accused of offences in 1990s and 2000s and back then he was able to plead guilty or not. 
 

You just cannot accept being embarrassed by others for pointing out your ignorance in assuming Floyd was shot and killed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 11:43 AM, singalion said:

 

By the way with above post you stated that you would not keep up with the truth and that you would keep silent on

inappropriate behaviour  or crimes of former presidents or deny the truth, if it does not fit your agenda, political spectrum etc.

 

This about your objectivity!

 

 


I did not state anything like that. Your post here clearly showed your tendency to put words into people’s mouths. 
 

This about your integrity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 1:49 PM, singalion said:

 

Guys !

 

Don't fall trap on these truth distortions by the RNC (Republican) Tweets:

 

Homicides in 22 US cities continue to rise in 2021 but at a slower pace, report says

(CNN) The number of homicides in the United States continued to rise in the first three quarters of 2021, but at a slower pace, one year after a record increase in murders, according to the latest quarterly report published Monday by the Council on Criminal Justice.

A study of homicides in 22 cities during the first nine months of this year showed the number of murders was 4% greater than the same period in 2020

 

 

 

=> The provisional numbers of 2021 only reflect 22 major cities in the US, which saw an increase of 4% but are not reflective of the whole of US.

 

 

And the blame on Biden goes fail also as I already evidenced.

 

 

 


Guys.
 

We must thank Singalion for scoring own goal for how Biden and his few Democrats are failing to maintain law and order. The article showed proof that under Biden, crime rates are increasing. 
 

Objective people will know crime rates are still increasing and it doesn’t matter whether it is increasing faster or slower. The key point is crime rates are still increasing under Biden in many states 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 1:52 PM, singalion said:

 

 

Just for the information to all BW readers and those following this thread:

 

The above was another truth distortion attempt by the Grand Old Party (Republicans) and their smear campaigners.

 

The numbers released by the FBI and CDC on which the CBS report was based refers to the increase of violent crime in 2020 and the release of data by both organisations.

 

RNC is now even using 2020 figures to blame Biden.

This is utterly manipulative and disgusting.

 

The provisional numbers of 2021 which were reported by an independent center released some days ago only reflect 22 major cities in the US, which saw an increase of 4% but are not reflective of the whole of US.

 

 

But let's ask:

Who was the US president in 2020?

 

Can anyone tell us?

 

 

And it is another example that 7heaven just parrots silly slogans without verifying the background!

 

The myth was debunked before it even took off.

 

 

 

 

 


Your attempt to confuse and distract is pathetic.

 

The reporter in the video already stated a few times ‘this year’ which is 2021. 
 

Anyone who bothers to delve deeper into this crime topic will know that the crime and murder rates surged in 2021 after Biden and Democrats took over the White House, Senate and Congress.
 

Readers who can go research on their own objectively will come to the same conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 3:07 PM, 7heaven said:

 

 

We have discussed this before at length.

 

President Biden is not in charge and not responsible for inflation.

 

Investopedia

What Causes Inflation

Inflation is a measure of the rate of rising prices of goods and services in an economy.

  • Inflation is a measure of the rate of rising prices of goods and services in an economy.
  • Inflation can occur when prices rise due to increases in production costs, such as raw materials and wages.
  • A surge in demand for products and services can cause inflation as consumers are willing to pay more for the product.
  • Some companies reap the rewards of inflation if they can charge more for their products as a result of the high demand for their goods.

Central banks of developed economies, including the Federal Reserve in the U.S., monitor inflation. The Fed has an inflation target of approximately 2% and adjusts monetary policy to combat inflation if prices rise too much or too quickly.

What Drives Inflation

There are various factors that can drive prices or inflation in an economy. Typically, inflation results from an increase in production costs or an increase in demand for products and services.

 

=>

 

Inflation is a result of supply and demand.

The reason for the increase of inflation in 2021 is a surge in energy prices and a huge surge in customer demand in the US.

 

These are the real reasons of the inflation in the US.

 

It has nothing to do with Biden.

It is not Biden's fault that the inflation rate in the US is higher this year.

 

Nobody here needs your posting of truth distortions or copying of manipulative one sided political propaganda.

 

Your posts only reflect your inability to understand the involved issues and are a sign of your  intellectual deficits.

 

 

 

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Inflation, explained: Why prices keep going up and who's to blame

201012141540-allison-morrow-headshot-sma

By Allison Morrow, CNN Business

 

Updated 1524 GMT (2324 HKT) November 13, 2021

 

New York (CNN Business)Confused about inflation? You're not alone.

 

Inflation is, paradoxically, both incredibly simple to understand and absurdly complicated.
 
Let's start with the simplest version: Inflation happens when prices broadly go up.
 
That "broadly" is important: At any given time, the price of goods will fluctuate based on shifting tastes. Someone makes a viral TikTok about brussels sprouts and suddenly everyone's gotta have them; sprouts prices go up. Meanwhile sellers of cauliflower, last season's trendy veg, are practically giving their goods away. Those fluctuations are constant.
 
 
Inflation is when the average price of virtually everything consumers buy goes up. Food, houses, cars, clothes, toys, etc. To afford those necessities, wages have to rise too.
 
It's not a bad thing. In the United States, for the past 40 years or so (and particularly this century), we've been living in an ideal low-and-slow level of inflation that comes with a well-oiled consumer-driven economy, with prices going up around 2% a year, if that. Sure, prices on some things, like housing and health care, are much higher than they used to be, but other things, like computers and TVs, have become much cheaper — the average of all the things combined has been relatively stable.
 
Still with me?
 
All right, let's cut to today, and why inflation is all over the news.

When 'inflation' is a bad word

Inflation becomes problematic when that low-and-slow simmer gets fired up to a boil. That's when you hear economists talk about the economy "overheating." For a variety of reasons, largely stemming from the pandemic, the global economy finds itself at a rigorous boil right now.
 
In the United States, prices have climbed 6.2% — the biggest increase since November 1990, and well above the Federal Reserve's long-term inflation goal of around 2%.
 
Americans haven't felt this bad about the economy in a decade
 
 
And here's where Econ 101 merges a bit with Psych 101. There's a behavioral economics aspect to inflation where it can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. When prices go up for a long enough period of time, consumers start to anticipate the price increases. You'll buy more goods today if you think they'll cost appreciably more tomorrow. That has the effect of increasing demand, which causes prices to rise even more. And so on. And so on.
 
That's where it can get especially tricky for the Federal Reserve, whose main job is to control money supply and keep inflation in check.

How'd we get here?

Blame the pandemic.
 
In the spring of 2020, as Covid-19 spread, it was like pulling the plug on the global economy. Factories around the world shut down; people stopped going out to restaurants; airlines grounded flights. Millions of people were laid off as business disappeared practically overnight. The unemployment rate in America shot up to nearly 15% from about 3.5% in February 2020.
 
It was the sharpest economic contraction on record.
 
By early summer, however, demand for consumer goods started to pick back up. Rapidly.
Demand went from zero to 100, but supply couldn't bounce back so easily.
When you pull the plug on the global economy, you can't just plug it back in and expect it start humming at the same pace as before.
 
Take cars, for example. Automakers saw the Covid crisis beginning and did what any smart business would do — shut down temporarily and try to mitigate losses. But not long after the pandemic shut factories down, it also drove up demand for cars as people worried about exposure on public transit and avoided flying. Automakers had whiplash.
 
Automakers' problems are much worse than we thought
 
 
 
Cars require an immense number of parts, from an immense number of different factories around the world, to be built by highly skilled laborers in other parts of the world. Getting all of those discreet operations back online takes time, and doing so while keeping workers from getting sick takes even more time.
 
Economists often describe inflation as too much money chasing too few goods. That's exactly what happened with cars. And houses. And Peloton bikes. And any number of other items that became hot ticket items.
 

How's the supply chain involved in all this?

"Supply chain bottlenecks" — that's another one you see all over, right?
 
Let's go back to the car example.
 
We know that high demand + limited supply = prices go up.
 
But high demand + limited supply + production delays = prices go up even more.
 
All modern cars rely on a variety of computer chips to function. But those chips are also used in cellphones, appliances, TVs, laptops and dozens of other items that, as bad luck would have it, were all in high demand at the same time.
 
This will be an incredibly expensive Christmas. Shoppers don't care
 
 
 
That's just one example of the disconnect in the global supply chain. Because new cars have been slow to roll in, used car demand shot through the roof, which drove overall inflation higher. In some cases, car owners were able to sell their used cars for more than what they paid for them a year or two prior.
 

What happens next?

Prices and wages are likely to keep going up well into 2022, officials and economists say. But for how long and how much depends on countless variables across the globe.
 
 
Policymakers' top priority is to unclog the supply chain bottlenecks to get goods moving at their pre-pandemic pace. That's a lot easier said than done. And there's no telling what kind of shocks — a resurgent Covid variant, a massive shipping container getting stuck in a key waterway, a natural disaster — could set back progress.
 
Economists and investors in the United States expect that the Fed will tighten monetary policy by raising interest rates and dialing back emergency stimulus, thereby slow the pace of inflation. When money becomes more expensive to borrow, that can take the heat off price increases and bring the economy back down to that nice, gentle simmer.

 

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 5:14 PM, 7heaven said:

 

 

Repeating the same nonsensical content doesn't make it to a truth or fact. 

 

The message of above tweet is as wrong as the other!

 

President Biden nor his policies are the cause of inflation.

 

President Biden is not in charge and not responsible for inflation.

 

Investopedia

What Causes Inflation

Inflation is a measure of the rate of rising prices of goods and services in an economy.

  • Inflation is a measure of the rate of rising prices of goods and services in an economy.
  • Inflation can occur when prices rise due to increases in production costs, such as raw materials and wages.
  • A surge in demand for products and services can cause inflation as consumers are willing to pay more for the product.
  • Some companies reap the rewards of inflation if they can charge more for their products as a result of the high demand for their goods.

Central banks of developed economies, including the Federal Reserve in the U.S., monitor inflation. The Fed has an inflation target of approximately 2% and adjusts monetary policy to combat inflation if prices rise too much or too quickly.

What Drives Inflation

There are various factors that can drive prices or inflation in an economy. Typically, inflation results from an increase in production costs or an increase in demand for products and services.

 

=>

 

Inflation is a result of supply and demand.

The reason for the increase of inflation in 2021 is a surge in energy prices and a huge surge in customer demand in the US.

 

These are the real reasons of the inflation in the US.

 

It has nothing to do with Biden.

It is not Biden's fault that the inflation rate in the US is higher this year.

 

Nobody here needs your posting of truth distortions or copying of manipulative one sided political propaganda.

 

Your repeated posts only reflect your inability to understand the involved issues and are a sign of your  intellectual deficits.

 

7heaven, go ahead and embarrass yourself more at BW. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert Cole Sprague (born April 18, 1973) is the 49th and current Ohio Treasurer of State. Prior to his election as treasurer, he represented the 83rd district in the Ohio House of Representatives, and served as city auditor and treasurer in his hometown of Findlay. He is a member of the Republican Party.

 

 

Someone like Sprague should know better, but he still prefers to post demagoguery. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lawrence Ari Fleischer (born October 13, 1960) is an American media consultant and political aide who served as the 23rd White House Press Secretary, for President George W. Bush, from January 2001 to July 2003.

 

 He is a member of the Republican Party.

 

 

 

 

This about objectivity...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Lawrence Ari Fleischer (born October 13, 1960) is an American media consultant and political aide who served as the 23rd White House Press Secretary, for President George W. Bush, from January 2001 to July 2003.

 He is a member of the Republican Party.

 

 

This about objectivity...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Open note:

 

It would be appreciated if the discussion in this thread would be more on a higher intellectual level. 

 

The past months it seems that the thread instead is totally abused by one Member as a platform to post partisan biased Republican twitter tweets. 

 

The thread is not meant to be a political campaign forum. 

 

 

All these partisan posts added by that one member are also unanimously unsubstantiated. 

 

 

This makes the discussion at this thread quite boring. 

 

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Open note: 

 

It would be appreciated if all posts are respectfully accepted and the members or guests who post them not to be subjected to personal attacks even if the posts are not what one likes to read even if it is true. 
 

When it comes to criticising a political party or political figures when a particular member dislikes, it is ok and not considered partisan or using this thread as a political campaign forum. But when it comes to pointing out the failings of another political party, it suddenly becomes unanimously unsubstantiated and then viewed as using this forum as political campaign forum. 
 

This further proves the cancel culture that a particular party is fond of and also perpetuated by their followers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 2:47 PM, 7heaven said:


Guys.
 

We must thank Singalion for scoring own goal for how Biden and his few Democrats are failing to maintain law and order. The article showed proof that under Biden, crime rates are increasing. 
 

Objective people will know crime rates are still increasing and it doesn’t matter whether it is increasing faster or slower. The key point is crime rates are still increasing under Biden in many states 

 

Not at all!

 

Biden is not in charge of such crimes as these crimes

 

Your denial on the distribution of goverment responsibilities ( = tasks) in the US is evident.

 

Here you can have it again:

 

Murder crimes do not fall into the Federal 

 

Here again the evidence:

The US police

Structure and organization

There’s no national police force in the US, where policing is organised on a state and local basis. The country has around 500,000 police officers and a total of 40,000 separate police forces,

 

 

The division between federal and state law

murder is classified as a state* crime,

 

* State here means US State like California, Florida, Texas etc.

 

 

Federal law enforcement can be divided into eight primary divisions

Oct 12, 2021

 

 

A federal police force is technically prohibited by the U.S. constitution.

 

The reason for this is that the nation’s founders thought that the best way to maintain a democratic government was to leave law enforcement decentralized and in the hands of the individual states

 

=>

Murder crimes fall into the responsibility of the State Governors of each of the 50 US states, aka Abbott, Santis etc

 

You still want to go on and embarrass yourself by denying such facts and the results of the US constitution and claim the Federal administration is in charge of violent crimes???

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest Meanly Preacher

LOL!

The flopped Afghanistan pullout was not Biden's fault;

The peak in illegal immigration was not Biden's fault; 

The highest record number of Covid deaths since the onset was not Biden's fault;

And now, the 40 year record high inflation is also not Biden's fault? 

 

I can almost hear him singing the words "I wasn't me" to the tune of "Shaggy it wasn't me" here. Never in thr entire history of American politics have we seen a POTUS so useless and so lacking in taking responsibility. What's the point of having a person like that in office if the only thing he is good for is to shirk responsibility? 

 

LOL! Let's see the mods moderating this post away. @7heaven, that's why you do not see many of the posts supporting you nowadays. All the Guest Guests posts were all subjected to review first before they get moderated away. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...
counter